I am really ashamed we are not putting money into the R & D of a true cruise missile, one like the tomahawk with thousands of kms of range. Even if the Brahmos work its small payload and poor range would mean it won’t be of that much use anyway. The most worrying thing about the report is the alleged price increase of the Russian components, why are we spineless when dealing with the Russians while even mention of an American arms purchase causes protests from all circles :(. Time to wake up people.

Bigger airframe and wings….

To bad that India didn’t get the first IAC constructed in a foreign yard….maybe even two. Which, would still leave India to construct 2-3 more……:(

Its operating costs Scoot, India can only afford two or three now. It will be able to afford more in the 2030s-40s-50s :diablo:

I just gave you some comparative data on specs but you conveniently look the other way. So whats the point?

Here, look at wiki for some straightforward stuff on wingloading, you’ll see why its so important. the blk 60s figures on this are totally out of proportion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_loading

USS.

I am asking for information on Block 60 vipers saying they are less maneuverable, excerpts like Pilots saying so, it being shown in DACT etc.

Lets wait till MRCA field trials and hope there will be some news in public realm about how every ac fared.

Don’t blame the IAF, the government wanted to act all fair and hold a competiton.

The MRCA is here for the long term, expected to be in service till 2040. So it do not make sense to get already used airframes. It would be an excellent stop-gap measure though, to get the UAE mirages.

I think Dassault should have offered both the Mirage 2000-5 (advanced varient with AESA) and the Rafale in the MRCA. The Mirage would have had an 80% chance of winning it.

I love single engined fighters 🙂

F16IN, while I believe is a better AC than the Super Hornet, thanks to a less draggy airframe, and porbably a more interesting industrial package (if you consider moving the production line to india), isn’t the best bang for the buck of the competitors. Keep in mind that it is still an overweight evolution of a 30 year old design, especially when you consider that you are always going to operate with conformal tanks, which will reduce TWR and drag even more.

So while I believe it’s a very capable aircraft, it is not up to par with competitors like Eurofighter, Rafale or Gripen NG.

Now if india is only looking for a strike aircraft with little dogfight capability, then be my guest. Anyway a HMS + AIM9X will make up for a big part of the lost agility, but it won’t bring much more than what the indian mirage 2000 updated to dash 5 or 9 standard bring to the table.

Nic

I think the TWR given for F 16s with CFT include the weight of the CFTs, I am not sure but if anyone can shed light on this that would be good.

The Rafale is the only aircraft that has a chance to exceed the F 16 IN in multirole capability, but the relative price and other factors may give the Super Viper the edge.

The EF is the best air superiority aircraft of the bunch, but its poor A2G performance and lack of commitment to Captor E. Price etc will knock it out for sure.

The Gripen NG does not have anything over the F 16 IN. F 16 IN has the better radar and can match and exceed the Gripen in all other aspects, Perhaps the Gripen has better aerodynamic performance, but that’s hardly a big thing in today’s battlefields.

The American types have the widest range of weapons available and thats another aspect which would be hard to beat. 😀

Oh and the F 16 IN will exceed the upgraded Mirages in BVR. Situational Awareness Electronic Warfare etc. :dev2: